Research Project Quick Reference
One page to keep open while you work. Everything the supplied teaching source sets out in tabular or list form, reproduced in its own wording, with the contradictions marked rather than tidied away.
How to read what follows
Three kinds of statement appear on this page and they carry very different weight. Keep the distinction in view, because the difference between a requirement and an illustration is where most research writing goes wrong.
THE THREE LABELS USED THROUGHOUT
| Label | What it means | How to treat it |
|---|---|---|
| Source requirement | A statement, definition or instruction the supplied teaching source makes directly | Quotable. Cite it as the teaching source, and cite the underlying published work where the source names one. |
| Source example | An illustrative figure or scenario the source uses to make a point | Never a standard. A sample size, a cost or a scale length from an example is that example's, not yours. |
| Derived | A structure, grouping or procedure assembled on this page from the source's own statements | Useful, but not citable as the source's position. Marked wherever it appears. |
Nothing on this page is invented. Where the source names something without defining it, the label is reproduced and the absence of a definition stated. The library's full vocabulary treatment is in Research Terminology: A Working Glossary.
What research is, and the words for it
The source opens with two dictionary definitions and one governing claim: all research is about the generation of knowledge, and as every project concludes and makes its contribution, the body of knowledge grows.
THE THREE FORMS OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS
| Form | Source definition |
|---|---|
| Exploratory research | Helps to identify and define a problem or question |
| Constructive research | Tests theories and proposes solutions to a problem or question |
| Empirical research | Information or evidence gained from observation, experience or experiment |
Scientific research — five characteristics
- Conducted within rules of science
- Based on logic
- Systematic analysis of evidence
- Can be replicated
- Knowledge is cumulative
Social science research — five characteristics
- Deals with people either in groups or individually
- Uses methods and traditions of social science
- People are less predictable than non-human phenomena
- The social world changes
- People are aware of research being conducted on them
The slide deck lists only four of the social science characteristics — it omits "the social world changes". The five-bullet version in the study notes is the fuller one and is the version reproduced here.
TERMS AND DEFINITIONS — THE SOURCE'S TERMINOLOGY TABLE
| Term | Source definition | Associated terms |
|---|---|---|
| Descriptive | Seeks to describe what is | Exploratory |
| Explanatory | Seeks to explain relationships between phenomena | Predictive |
| Evaluative | Seeks to test policy/management outcomes against benchmarks | — |
| Qualitative | Research in which words (and possibly images, sounds) are the medium | — |
| Quantitative | Research in which numbers are the main medium | — |
| Primary data | Data directly observed or gathered by the researcher engaged in the research project. These sources are relevant, timely and reliable | — |
| Secondary data | Use of existing data gathered by other people/organisations for other purposes. These sources are interpreted by others | — |
| Inductive | Hypotheses/explanations/propositions are generated from examination of the data | Exploratory |
| Deductive | Data collected to test a prior hypothesis/proposition | Hypothetical-deductive, confirmatory |
THE FIVE BASIC ELEMENTS OF THE RESEARCH PROJECT
| Element | Source definition |
|---|---|
| Epistemology | The theory of knowing; embedded in the theoretical perspective and thus in the methodology |
| Methodology | The strategy used to carry out the study; the design of the study |
| Methods | The way in which the data to be used in the study is gathered |
| Ontology | Assumptions about the nature of being: embedded in the theoretical perspective and thus in the methodology |
| Theoretical perspective | The philosophical framework informing the methodology |
Treated in full at The Five Basic Elements of a Research Project.
THE SECOND, SHORTER GLOSS THE SOURCE ALSO GIVES
| Term | Source definition | Associated terms |
|---|---|---|
| Ontology | Ways of looking at work | Paradigm, Philosophy |
| Epistemology | Relationship between researcher and topic being researched | — |
| Method | Ways of gathering and analysing data | Techniques |
Both tables are in the supplied source and they gloss ontology and epistemology differently. Neither has been chosen over the other.
The consequences of that double definition, and the order the five elements actually sit in, are worked through at The Five Basic Elements of a Research Project.
The philosophical stack
The source's reading of its own figure: philosophy sits underneath everything, methodology sits on top of philosophy, and methods sit on top of methodology. Epistemological and ontological assumptions are embedded in the theoretical perspective, which is embedded in the methodology used in the study.
- Fundamental philosophies
- Research methodologies
- Data collection methods
THE METHODOLOGICAL PYRAMID — ALL THIRTY-FIVE LABELS
| Tier | Labels |
|---|---|
| Apex — data collection methods (13) | Observation · Questionnaires · Interviews · Focus groups · Scales · Projective techniques · Images · Vignettes · Life history · Narrative · Diaries · Documents/Records/Archives · Internet research |
| Middle — research methodologies (14) | Survey · Case study · Experimental design · Ethnography · Action research · Grounded theory · Content analysis · Discourse analysis · Documentary analysis · Textual analysis · Semiotics · Image-based research · Archival research · Feminist research |
| Base — fundamental philosophies (8) | Positivism · Constructionism · Interpretivism · Functionalism · Critical theory · Feminism · Post structuralism · Post modernism |
These are labels only. The source defines some of them elsewhere and most of them nowhere.
Which of those thirty-five labels the source defines, and which are names with nothing attached, is set out at The Methodological Pyramid.
EPISTEMOLOGICAL POSITIONS — THE SOURCE'S TABLE
| Term | Source definition | Associated terms |
|---|---|---|
| Positivist | Hypotheses (suppositions, propositions) tested using objectively collected factual data; if successful leads to scientific laws | Scientific method, logical empiricist, objectivist |
| Post-positivist | Hypotheses found to be consistent with data establishing probable facts or laws | — |
| Constructivist | People construct their own views of reality and researcher seeks to discover this | Social constructivism |
| Interpretive | People provide their own accounts or explanations of situations and behaviours | Phenomenology, ethnography, phenomenography, symbolic interaction, intersubjectivity, subjectivist |
| Critical inquiry | Research is influenced by beliefs/values critical of the status quo in society | Standpoint |
- The positions the source's prose names as those generally considered: positivism, constructionism and interpretivism.
- Other philosophical frameworks it names as used in social science research: functionalism, symbolic interactionism, feminism, critical inquiry and postmodernism.
- Each of these, the source states, represents a particular framework for viewing the social world and particular ontological and epistemological standpoints.
Methodologies and research design
THE SEVEN METHODOLOGIES THE SOURCE DEFINES
| Methodology | Source definition | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Historical | The synthesis of evidence to establish facts and draw conclusions about the past through considering: where the event happened; who was involved; when the event occurred; what kind of activity was involved | Qualitative |
| Comparative | Often used with historical research to compare different societies whether in the past or in parallel in the present | Qualitative |
| Descriptive | Relies on observations as a way of collecting data that are recorded to be subsequently analysed. Depends on human responses and observations. Can be distorted by selective observation and biased interviews | Qualitative |
| Correlation | Describes the statistical measure of association between two phenomena. Studies may be relational or prediction | Quantitative |
| Experimental | Every relevant condition is isolated and controlled in the event investigated to observe the effects when conditions are manipulated | Quantitative |
| Evaluation | Descriptive research designed to deal with complex social issues. Participants are equal partners in the design, implementation, interpretation and results | Qualitative |
| Action | Research carried out in the real world — designed to deal with a specific problem in a particular situation. There is little or no control over independent variables | Qualitative |
The source adds: "Other research methodologies may include ethnogeny, feminist, cultural." It defines none of those three.
On selection, the whole of the source's guidance is: look at significant papers in the field you are investigating, work out what methodology they are using, use similar methods, and speak to your supervisor. It also states that different kinds of research questions require different kinds of approaches. The seven definitions are unpacked in Research Methodologies: An Overview.
Qualitative — what the source says
- Non-numerical; represents different qualities of a phenomenon
- Word data, pictures or other non-numerical forms
- Commonly attribute (categorical) or ordinal data
- Counts and proportions derived from categories are often the basis for analysis
- Ordered categories — such as a 5 or 7 point satisfaction scale — are ordinal data
Quantitative — what the source says
- Uses a numerical scale based on an agreed measurement process
- Gives a more sensitive description than categorisation alone
- Relies on random sampling and structured instruments that fit diverse experiences into predetermined categories
- Produces results that can be summarised, compared and generalised
- Concerned with testing hypotheses derived from theory, or estimating the size of a phenomenon
THE SOURCE'S THREE WORKED QUESTION-AND-METHOD PAIRINGS
| Question | Method given in the source | Type |
|---|---|---|
| What impact does changing WHS laws and policies have on engagement of volunteers? | Classical secondary legal research, narrowly defined; discovering statements of policy and other policy documents; collect data on numbers and type of volunteering before and after; compare and interpret how the laws have changed, been interpreted and adopted | Not labelled |
| How has on-line learning impacted on numbers of students enrolling in post-graduate courses? | Collect data on the various on-line courses and assess the impact on numbers enrolling before and after the introduction of the strategy; research and compare with other enrolment strategies | Quantitative |
| How do managers and workers apply the ethical standards of service organisations? | Interviews or questionnaires, following up responses to specific applications | Qualitative |
Source examples, not templates. Two are labelled on the slide; the first is not labelled anywhere.
Two design instructions sit alongside these. In any relevant or practical research it is usually essential to use several types of research method, even if one or two take the bulk of the time. And in allocating time, plan half for doing the research and half for writing and rewriting.
The two process models, side by side
The source presents the research process twice, in different weeks, at different lengths, and the two do not reconcile.
SEVEN-STAGE MODEL AGAINST TEN-STEP MODEL
| # | Seven-stage model | Ten-step model (section headings) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Identification of research problem | Begin with an idea |
| 2 | Literature review | Review the research topic |
| 3 | Specifying the purpose of research and establishing the conceptual framework | Check the literature |
| 4 | Determine specific research questions or hypotheses | Decide your research question |
| 5 | Data collection | Design your research |
| 6 | Analysing and interpreting the data | Seek ethics clearance |
| 7 | Reporting and evaluating research | Conduct research |
| 8 | — | Draw conclusions |
| 9 | — | Write your report |
| 10 | — | Store data |
Both models are set out in full, with the differences worked through, at The Research Process: The Seven-Stage Model and The Research Process: The Ten-Step Thesis Model.
- Steps 1–4Idea, topic review, literature, question. The source's warning here is about scope: many people take on too big a project at first.
- Step 5Design. Methods follow the question, never the reverse, and several method types are usually needed.
- Step 6Ethics clearance, before any data is collected. The source defers the substance to a later topic not in the supplied material.
- Steps 7–8Conduct and conclude. Theorising means establishing where the data supports and where it contradicts the literature.
- Steps 9–10Write and store. You cannot write the report before you have collated, interpreted and concluded.
Every screening question the source asks
These five checklists are the most directly usable material in the whole source. All items are the source's own questions, reproduced in its wording.
Deciding on a topic
- Are there any particular problems, sensitivities or issues about this research idea that stand out from the start?
- Would those problems be substantial enough to stop or substantially delay the project, given the restricted time you have?
- Is there anything written about this issue or topic — any literature, any published research?
- If there is little literature on the topic, have you sought advice about whether to continue? It is likely you will be advised against continuing.
- Who has been writing on this topic, and when? Recently?
- Where is it being written about — journals, newspapers, online?
- What is being written about it? Have you located the journal articles online?
- Have you checked the requirements of what your final project should look like before selecting the topic?
Reviewing the topic before you settle on it
- Are the research questions worth asking? Why?
- Have they already been answered? Is there extensive research already in existence?
- In whose interest are the questions being asked?
- How well do the research methods fit the aims of the research? Are they the best way of answering the research questions?
- Do you have the time, money or access to necessary data to answer the question?
- How could the research findings be used or interpreted by other people?
- What am I most interested in? If the topic is not of interest to you it will be a real slog.
- What topic or idea can I focus on and in which I have technical knowledge?
- What should I include and, more importantly, exclude? What are my boundaries?
- What are the relevant questions I can ask? What is my particular focus?
- What is my timeframe?
Deciding the research question
- What do I want to know?
- What are the specific questions I need to ask?
- What do I need to find out to answer the questions?
- Where can I find it?
- What sort of information do I need — anecdotal, historical, multiple sources?
- Will I use primary and/or secondary sources of data?
- How much data or information is enough?
- What authority do I need to collect this data or information?
- How current does this information need to be?
- Can I state the research question in one sentence?
Ethics screening — the whole of what the source asks
- Does your project require you to access confidential or personal information?
- Are your questions appropriate and respectful of the cultural norms?
- Are your methods of collection unbiased and ethical?
- Have you sought the right approvals before you commence any research?
Feasibility — the four practical considerations
- How long will the research take to accomplish?
- Are there important ethical constraints that need consideration?
- Can you achieve the needed cooperation to take the project to its successful conclusion?
- How significant are the costs of conducting the research?
The feasibility material, including the tradeoff framing, is worked through at Assessing Research Topic Feasibility.
Topics, themes and the researcher's own kit
WHERE RESEARCH IDEAS COME FROM
| Source of ideas | What the source says about it |
|---|---|
| The experience of practical problems in the field | Researchers engaged in programme implementation come up with ideas from what they see happening around them; others work with people who are, in order to learn what needs to be better understood |
| The literature in your specific field | Many researchers get ideas by reading the literature and thinking of ways to extend or refine previous research |
| Requests for proposals | Published by government agencies and some companies; they describe the problem, the context, the approach wanted and the amount payable — virtually handing the researcher an idea |
| The researcher's own thinking | Ideas you come up with yourself, influenced by your background, culture, education and experiences |
The source also names three closer-to-home origins: your studies in your degree, your work in your industry, and readings in media and journals related to your industry.
THE FOURTEEN SUGGESTED PROJECT MANAGEMENT THEMES
| # | Theme | # | Theme |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Leadership and soft skills | 8 | Hi-tech and bio-tech projects |
| 2 | Stakeholder management | 9 | Project costing and estimating |
| 3 | Virtual project management and teams | 10 | Project management in developing countries |
| 4 | Communications management | 11 | Project management education |
| 5 | Research and development projects | 12 | Applied project management |
| 6 | Risk management and practices | 13 | Managing transition from construction to operations |
| 7 | Global project and internationalisation | 14 | Asset management |
The source states this list is by no means exclusive, and may not be appropriate outside project management.
What a finishable question inside each theme looks like, and which themes have a published exemplar behind them, is set out at Research Themes in Project Management.
The researcher's core skills, as the source lists them
- Attention to detail
- Numerical skills
- Computer literacy
- Strong Excel capabilities
- Being an effective communicator
- Ability to interpret and analyse data to turn it into information
What the theoretical framework has to do
- Provide the structure for your research project
- Establish your expertise in the area
- Detail the current state of knowledge
- Highlight what is known and any gaps in what is known
- Detail the theory from which the research has emerged
- Outline the theory to which your research will contribute
- Guide the research in terms of data gathering
- List all possible aspects of the topic of interest to you, then list as many elements as you can think of in each aspect.
- Cluster the elements into categories and determine the aspect that is of most interest to you.
- Select a title that focuses the nature of your topic and illustrates its boundaries, and that includes your main interest.
- Ensure relevant material is available and the topic is doable.
- Be flexible about the topic, as it will evolve as you discover more.
Where the source runs out
A reference page that only reproduced the tables would mislead. This register lists every point at which the supplied material is thin, self-contradictory or defers elsewhere. Each one is a place where you need a second source.
DEFECT AND GAP REGISTER FOR THE SUPPLIED SOURCE
| Where | What the problem is | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Social science characteristics | Slides give four bullets, study notes give five. "The social world changes" is missing from the slides. | Use the five-bullet version; note the discrepancy if you cite it. |
| The five basic elements | Two tables in the same week's material gloss ontology and epistemology differently — "the theory of knowing" against "relationship between researcher and topic being researched". | Present both; do not silently choose one. |
| The methodological pyramid | Thirty-five labels, most of them never defined anywhere in the supplied material. | Find and cite a definition from a methods text before using any undefined label. |
| Epistemological positions | The prose says constructionism, the table says constructivist, the figure says constructionism. | Flag the variation and state which term you are using and why. |
| Data collection methods | One paragraph of principle — data constitutes evidence — plus thirteen undefined labels. Nothing on how to select or design an instrument. | Treat this as the largest content gap in the source and go elsewhere for instrument design. |
| The process models | An eleven-item bullet list against ten numbered section headings, with "store data" appearing only in the headings. | Follow the section headings; note that the process is described as ever-changing rather than fixed. |
| Qualitative and quantitative | The source classifies attribute and ordinal data as forms of qualitative data. Many texts treat them as levels of measurement handled quantitatively. | Present the source's framing as the source's and acknowledge the tension. |
| Ethics | Three screening questions and one instruction, with the substance deferred to a topic not in the supplied material — while ethics is a stated subject learning objective. | Use your institution's ethics process as the authority. The screening questions are a prompt, not a procedure. |
| Storing data | The requirement is stated as institution-specific and the specific requirements are not reproduced. | Get the current rules from your institution before you finish, not after. |
| Thesis structures and styles | A stated Week 2 learning objective with no supporting content; the only pointer is to an archive outside the supplied files. | Use your institution's published thesis requirements and compare completed theses yourself. |
| Week 3 document defect | The "Is the study feasible?" heading and three preceding paragraphs are duplicated, and one instance is truncated mid-word. | A defect in the supplied file, not a content difference. Read the complete instance. |
Register update: two gaps now closed
The defect register above lists ethics and data storage as points where the supplied material ran out. Both have since been supplied and both entries are superseded.
SUPERSEDED REGISTER ENTRIES
| Register entry | Status | Where it is now covered |
|---|---|---|
| Ethics deferred to a topic not in the dataset | Closed | Research ethics quick reference |
| Data storage requirements named but not stated | Closed — five years minimum, seven with a state government department | Research data storage, retention and ownership |
All other entries in the register above still stand.
The proposal material supplied alongside it has its own reference page: Research proposal quick reference.
What to carry forward
- The source's most usable material is its roughly forty screening questions. Run them in order: topic, review, question, ethics, feasibility.
- The fit rule governs everything: every step must be appropriate to the nature, aim, population and context of the study.
- Two process models, two glosses of the five elements, two spellings of constructionism. The source does not reconcile any of them and neither should you.
- Seven methodologies are defined; most of the thirty-five pyramid labels are not. Never use an undefined label without finding a citable definition first.
- Time allocation is offered as advice, not a rule — the source says “it is a good idea to” plan half your time for the research and half for writing and rewriting.
- The register in the final section tells you exactly where you need a second source. Ethics and data collection are the two biggest.
- Nothing illustrative in this source is a standard. Sample sizes, scale lengths and costs in examples belong to those examples.
Frequently asked questions
Which process model should I follow, the seven-stage or the ten-step?
Use the ten-step section headings as your working structure, since the source presents its detailed material under them, and hold the seven-stage model as the shorter summary of the same process. Be aware that neither is a fixed sequence — the source explicitly describes the process as ever-changing rather than a set of fixed steps, and says research questions evolve as evidence accumulates.
Why do two tables define epistemology differently?
Because both appear in the supplied source, in the same week's material. One calls it the theory of knowing, embedded in the theoretical perspective and thus in the methodology; the other calls it the relationship between researcher and topic being researched. The source does not reconcile them. If you cite either, say which you are using.
Can I use a methodology from the pyramid that the source never defines?
Yes, but not on the source's authority. Twelve of the fourteen methodologies on the figure have no definition anywhere in the supplied material. Find a definition in a cited methods text or in significant papers in your field, record it with the citation, and use that as the basis for your choice.
Is the ethics checklist here enough to get approval?
No. The four items are the whole of what the supplied source provides, and it explicitly defers the substantive treatment to a topic that is not part of the supplied material. Use them as an early screen while you are still choosing a topic, and get your institution's actual ethics process before you design anything that touches people or confidential information.
How long should each phase of the project take?
The source gives one ratio and no other timings: plan half your time for doing the research itself and the other half for writing and rewriting. Everything else about scheduling is yours to work out, and the feasibility questions ask you to think about how long the research will take before you commit.
What is the fastest way to check whether my design holds together?
Run the fit rule over each step. Is this step appropriate to the nature of the study, its aim, its population and its context? Any step that fails one of the four is the step to fix, and the failure usually traces back to a methodology chosen before the question was fixed.
References and source attribution
- The supplied teaching source: consolidated week 1, week 2 and week 3 teaching notes, study notes and slide material on research methods and developing a research topic. All tables, lists and screening questions on this page are reproduced from it.
- Quinlan, C. 2011, Business Research Methods, 1st ed., Cengage Publishing. Chapter 1, p. 50 — the source of the methodological pyramid.
- Clarke, R. J. 2005, Research methods and methodologies, pp. 35–45 — the work adapted for the methodologies table.
- Veal, A. J. 2005, Business Research Methods: A Managerial Approach, Longman — attributed in the source for the social science research characteristics.
- Trochim, W. M. K. 2006, Research Methods Knowledge Base — the excerpt reproduced in the source on where research ideas come from and whether a study is feasible.
- The Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary, p. 972 — the two definitions of research the source uses.
- Bryman, A. 2016, Social Research Methods, 5th ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford; O'Leary, Z. 2017, The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project, 3rd ed., Sage Publications, London; Naoum, S. G. 2013, Dissertation Research & Writing for Construction Students, 3rd ed., Routledge — the reading list accompanying the supplied material.
Suggested questions for Ask KEVOS
- Give me the source's screening questions as a single ordered checklist I can work through this week.
- Which of the terms on this page does the supplied source define, and which are labels only?
- Compare the seven-stage and ten-step process models and tell me where they disagree.
- Run the fit rule over my research design: nature, aim, population, context.
- Which gaps in the register apply to the study I am planning, and what second source do I need for each?